Memoirs of the Duchesse de Dino (Afterwards Duchesse de Talleyrand et de Sagan), 1836-1840. Dorothée Dino

Чтение книги онлайн.

СКАЧАТЬ would have set her free; all this was written in the most touching style. Another point is that when M. Ladvocat sent money to Fieschi, that he might provide himself with some small dainties in prison, instead of spending the money, he sent it to this woman Nina. She wrote to thank him more or less in the following terms: "I thank you for thus depriving yourself for my sake; with what you have sent me I have bought a few decent things to do you credit before your judges, but as you will soon be unable to send me anything more, I am economising, and am now mistress of forty francs."

      This remark concerning economy is disgusting. Moreover, she wrote to Fieschi to assure him that she had remained faithful to him, which is untrue. Everybody seems to have been far more interested by these amorous details than by the actual crime. What a strange time it is! Fieschi's correspondence, in passing through the hands of M. Decazes, became the amusement of the House of Peers; but the truly astonishing fact is the notoriety which the whole story has given to Mlle. Nina, who was formerly resident in the Salpêtrière. It is asserted that monetary proposals have been made to her by men of high position; there is no doubt that one hears the strangest descriptions of her beauties and her imperfections, and it is a positive fact that she has only one eye.

      If Fieschi is a lover, he is no less attracted by religion. When the almoner of the Chamber of Peers asked those under trial if they wished to hear Mass, Fieschi alone replied yes, and said that he was anxious to hear it as he was neither a heathen nor an atheist; that if he was not a theological expert he had nevertheless read Plutarch and Cicero and firmly believed in the immortality of the soul; as the soul was not divisible it could not be material, and that, in short, he believed in the spiritual nature of man. He asked the almoner to come and see him again and not to leave him after his sentence had been pronounced. In view of such inconsistencies, how is it possible to pass any absolute judgment on men?

      I believe the following to be an accurate bulletin of the Ministerial crisis: Yesterday morning the King sent for Dupin, Sauzet, and Passy, and commissioned them to form a Ministry upon two conditions only: firstly, they were not to give a post to any one who had voted against the repressive laws; secondly, the Minister for Foreign Affairs must be a man who would reassure European opinion and be agreeable to himself. The three men replied that they understood the King's wishes, but that they could not bind themselves until they had consulted their friends; they then withdrew. At the Chamber they sent round a list, which was drawn up nearly as follows: Dupin to be Minister of Justice and President, Passy to be Minister of Finance, Flahaut of Foreign Affairs, Molitor of War, Montalivet of the Interior. I have since learned that Montalivet refused the post in spite of the King's wishes, and that the King refused to accept the nomination of Flahaut. The King wished to appoint Rumigny or Baudrand to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and would have declared for the latter, if there had not been a wish to retain him as a companion to the Prince Royal on his travels. The Prince is very pleased at the fall of the last Ministry: I believe he is wrong; the Flahaut party are delighted. The Ministerial party hope to secure the election of M. Guizot as President of the Chamber of Deputies; the Opposition will support M. Martin du Nord.

      In the evening I accompanied M. de Talleyrand to a dinner given by M. de Montalivet. Counts Pahlen and Apponyi were pale with fear inspired by the sight of M. de Flahaut's name on a list of Ministers. Marshal Maison was regretting the loss of his ambassadorship at St. Petersburg with cries of rage which were not in the best of taste.

      We then went to the last Ministerial reception given by the Duc de Broglie. M. de Broglie believes himself to be fully in touch with the requirements of the time; he has no suspicion of the actual truth, that he is the sole cause and object of the squabbling which is going on, that he is the man rejected by the Chamber, and that if he were to say to his colleagues, "I see that I am myself the real stumbling-block; I will withdraw, but I beg you to remain," M. Molé would take his place and everything would be settled to the general satisfaction.

      Paris, February 11, 1836.– Madame de Rumford died yesterday morning after breakfast; she had had some friends to dinner the evening before. She had been much changed for some time, but has always refused to acknowledge herself an invalid, and remained as discourteous to death as she was to those about her. The loss of her salon will be felt; it was a meeting-place, and there are very few that are habitually regarded as such. Every one found something there to remind him of this or that period of his life. This loss has saddened me; it is not well to have reached the age of eighty-four. But M. de Rigny was fifty, Clémentine de Flahaut sixteen, Yolande de Valençay two! Life is threatened at every step of the ladder, and one must always be ready.

      That old cat Sémonville, whose claws are always ready, reached the Luxembourg yesterday with the announcement that the Ministry was at length settled. He was surrounded with questioners, and gave the list as follows: "President of the Council, Madame Adélaide; Justice and Public Worship, the Duchesse de Broglie; Foreign Affairs, the Duchesse de Dino;10 Interior, the Comtesse de Boigne; War, the Comtesse de Flahaut; Marine, the Duchesse de Massa; Finance, the Duchesse de Montmorency; Commerce, the Marquise de Caraman!" I sent this piece of wit to Madame de Lieven, in reply to a note asking for certain information; she replied that the King's condition at least was fulfilled, and that the Minister of Foreign Affairs was not likely to disturb Europe.

      This is poor stuff, but poorer still is the fact that it is impossible to form a Ministry, in seriousness or otherwise. Yesterday I was at the Tuileries. The Ministers who had resigned were all grouped about the King, but, I think, with no particular object. It is deplorable!

      Paris, February 12, 1836.– Of Ministerial news there is none; all that I have learned yesterday is as follows: Dupin, Passy, and Sauzet spent three hours with the King, and told him that they could not undertake the formation of a Ministry, as various intrigues had made the attempt impossible; they were, however, ready themselves to enter the Ministry, if their services were agreeable to the King. They then withdrew, and the King sent for M. Molé in the course of the evening, but I cannot say what passed at this interview.

      Paris, February 13, 1836.– I have the following information as regards the events of yesterday concerning the Ministerial crisis. M. Molé declares that he will not take office without M. Thiers, who will not come in without M. Guizot; he, again, will not act without M. de Broglie, unless the latter recognises that he is himself the only real obstacle, insists that his colleagues should take office without him, and writes them a letter to that effect, dated from Broglie. M. de Salvandy attempted to enlighten him upon this point, but met with a very poor reception. A lively scene is said to have taken place between MM. de Broglie and Guizot; certainly M. de Broglie is obviously agitated, and so ill-tempered as to rouse the pity of his friends and the contempt of other men. Some people think that the King will summon de Broglie and request him with greater authority than Salvandy used to put an end to this deplorable state of affairs, which is only continued on his account.

      Dupin's chance has entirely disappeared. During the two days when it was thought that he would be Minister, Thiers and Guizot both entered the competition for the Presidency, and so gained an opportunity of counting the votes in their favour. M. Guizot received eight, M. Martin du Nord fifteen; the remainder of the Ministerial party would have voted for M. Thiers and secured for him the refusal of the position.

      Paris, February 16, 1836.– Fieschi and his accomplices have been condemned to death; M. de Mareuil came yesterday to tell us of the sentence, at eleven o'clock in the evening.11

      It seems that many of the peers gave long explanations to justify their manner of voting. A small fraction of the Chamber considered that the circumstantial evidence against Pépin and Morey was inadequate to justify the extreme penalty, and preferred to inflict penal servitude for life. Fieschi was condemned to death unanimously, and M. Barthe asked that the punishments reserved for parricides should be added to the death penalty.

      The newspapers announce the death of Madame Bonaparte; her great-granddaughter – that is, the daughter of Joseph, СКАЧАТЬ